My last two post thoughts have dealt with the call of God to early Christians to confront false teachings by delineating more clearly their own doctrine and doctrinal authority. The primary purpose of this delineation was to safeguard the center of the faith, the person and work of Jesus Christ. Now lets look more closely at the way the Church was led to spell out more clearly who Jesus Christ is.
Two primary questions about Jesus occupied the forefront of Christian thought for more than a century, from c. A.D 320 to 451, although the concerns go back far earlier than 320 and in many respects continue today. The first question was this: Is Jesus truly God? Secondly, if Jesus is divine, as the Church was to affirm, what is the relationship between his divinity and his humanity? Also, in the long process in which the Church took a stand on this, another question arose: Who is the Holy Spirit- God himself, or something less than God?
These are extremely complex and extremely important issues. Let me attempt to summaries the Church's answers first. Four major gatherings of bishops the first four gatherings known as Ecumenical Councils ( because for the most part their decisions involved, and were accepted by leaders from all over the Christian world) dealt with these big theological questions, with the following responses:
Jesus is true God... (council of Nicea, AD. 324, reaffirmed at council of Constantinople, 381) and true man... in one person... with two natures (council of Ephesus, 431 and council of Chalcedon, 451)
Also, the person of the Holy Spirit was clarified in this process, as the doctrine of the Trinity was delineated
The primary question was: Is Christ divine? Around A.D. 320 in Alexandria, Egypt, an influential Christian presbyter named Arius said: No. Oh sure, you could call Jesus "divine"..partly out of respect... and partly because in a sense he was a god..but not God in the sense that the Father is God. Arius said that Christ was created by the Father, and then Christ, in turn, made the rest of creation. Arius and his supporters were attacked for their views and were excommunicated by Egyptian and Libyan bishops. Both sides, plus a third, larger, initially more "neutral" group of church leaders, were summoned to Nicea. The man who called them together was a newly converted emperor named Constantine. Constantine had won an intense power struggle for control of the Roman Empire, and he believed that it was by Christ's help that he had conquered. He became the first Christian emperor. He was probably more concerned about political unity than about fine theological distinctions, But the issue that faced the church was no mere fringe matter. It focused on the very center of the faith. So it is good that Constantine worried so much about imperial disunity. At the heated, often raucous, council over which he presided, the verdict finally came: Christ is truly God... not just like God, as the Arians wanted to say. Jesus is "true God from true God," as today's translation of the Nicene Creed puts it. Incidentally, the Nicene Creed as we know it does not date in final form from the Council of Nicea. However, this Council of A.D. 325 did produce a prototype of our creed, called the Creed of Nicea. Not all Christians accepted tha creed. Some bitterly fought it. The leader of the Trinitarian theology that was clarified at Nicea, a man named Athanasius, was later exiled five times. But still, God used Nicea for his purposes.
The equality of the Holy Spirit with the Father and the Son, along with the reaffirmation and further clarification of the Creed of Nicea's stress on the divinity of Christ, were contributions of the Second Ecumenical Council, at Constantinople in A.D. 381. A year earlier Emperor Theodosius had, in effect, made Christianity the established religion of the Roman Empire. His edict decreed that all should "hold the faith which the holy Apostle Peter gave to the Romans." Theodosius called the council of 381.
Now that the divinity of Jesus was for the most part agreed upon (though the Arians' views continued to prevail in several areas of the Church, such as among some of the northern peoples of "barbarian" background), questions arose concerning the relationship of Christ's divinity and humanity. Was Jesus two persons-one human and one divine? No, said the council at Ephesus in A.D 431, Christ is one person.
Two natures characterized Jesus, said the Council of Chalcedon in A.D. 451, called by Emperor Marcian. It is a very long complex story to trace various views of how Christ's humanity and divinity were related. Let's say simply that there was heated "discussion." For instance, as someone put it at one Church meeting "books as well as insults were thrown." Another indication of violent disagreement was the fact that the Patriarch of Constantinople was so severely wounded in a riot over Christ's natures that he died of his injuries. The matter finally got settled in 451 , although, as with the unorthodox views of Arius decades earlier, other ideas prevailed in several parts of the Church. For example, a man named Nestorius said that only Jesus the man suffered on the Cross, not God incarnate. Complex and hair- splitting as these early theological debates may seem today, they were essential in lifting up the saving act of God in Christ as involving true divinity and also true humanity.
Lasting thoughts: There is a mystery in God's reconciling, act in Christ which we ought not dissolve by oversimplification,ie., saying that Christ is only God or only human. Good creeds don't dissolve mysteries, they preserve them. God can use highly mixed motives (such as emperors' political goals) in building up his Church and clarifying its message. Some theologians today try to explain Christianity without reference to the Trinity. The Holy Spirit's leading in early Church councils and through the years should indicate how very important this teaching is.Finally many people today do not accept the divinity of Jesus. Some downplay his humanity. How do we respond to these basic questionings today? How best can we speak/discuss today about who Jesus is, as we seek to introduce others the Savior?
God Bless You and this Ministry
Monday, July 18, 2011
Sunday, July 10, 2011
The Church's Challenge to delineate its doctrine
Because of the many attacks by false teachers from earliest times, it was imperative that the church protect the Gospel of Jesus Christ by clarifying its own teachings. This meant dealing with the question of how the church is to decide what is true and false. In response to many assaults on the Gospel, the church clarified its doctrine with the help of three kinds of authority, which I will summarize as church, canon, and creeds.
The Church gradually (leadership) focused its chief teaching authority in the office of bishop. Bishops were viewed as rallying points of church unity and as key defenses against heresy (false teaching) as early as c.A.D. 110-115 in the letters of Ignatius, who was bishop of Antioch in Syria. A few decades later, synods (councils) of of various bishops met to deal with threats created by the teachings of a man named Montanus. Other challenges to cardinal Christian truths continued to expose the need for an office within the Church to serve as guardian of the Gospel. Th ordained ministry and especially the chief pastors developed largely as protectors of the Treasure of the Gospel. A key point in this process in the early Church wa the gathering of bishops known as the Council of Nicea, which had to deal with a denial of the full divinity of Christ. In all there were seven major councils of church leaders between A.D. 325 and 787. These are known as the "Seven Ecumenical Councils." Their pronouncements are accepted by virtually the whole Church today.
By the middle of the second century, a man named Marcion had devised his own personal canon of Scripture. A canon is a list of books to be included in the bible. Marcion's distorted theology led him to a Bible of only eleven books, all of them fro the New Testament, none form the Old. Partly because of this severe truncation of Scripture, and partly because of later continuing doctrinal threats, the Church was led by the Holy Spirit to declare an authoritative canon. A council of rabbis had done this for the Old Testament near the end of the first century A.D. Although many New Testament lasted for around two hundred years. This development culminated officially in the final list produced by the Council of Carthage in 397, so, in a sense, representatives of the Church produced the canon. But, for the most part, they were simply acknowledging the scriptural books that had already been accepted as authoritative by most parts of the church. Since every book of the New Testament was written by a member of the church, it is clear that, in the chronology of the Holy Spirit's working, the church preceded the New Testament and produced the New Testament, under divine guidance. The church's book became the single most important component of its doctrinal authority.
Creeds developed not for the ake of intellectual disputation, but to protect the Gospel of Jesus Christ from distortions. Their purpose was not to try to explain what really are mysteries, but rather to protct the mysteries from those who wanted to try toecplain them away. For instance, the Nicene Creed seeks to safeguard the mystery of Christ as both human and divine by eliminating two simplistic options, that Christ was only God , or only human. The Apostles Creed apparently grew out of an ancient baptismal creed, in question-and answer form, used from A.D. 150 in Rome. Gradual developments led to the form in which we now know it A.D. 400 or later.
If we wanted to move beyond the earliest Christian times that we have been describing, we could add a fourth "C" to our list of sources of doctrine namely confessions. In this sense, the word applies to basic statements of faith made by church bodies after the era of the Seven Ecumenical Councils.
As always in learning about church history. the call to faith comes into play. These developments merely are a matter of human defensiveness against the unsettling positions of "outsiders"? Are they simply the scheme of an increasingly organized and privileged Church to protect its own power and authority? Faith answers differently. While always acknowledging human factors and plenty of human error! in history, faith answers with it own confession. The Holy Spirit has led the process of Church and canon and creeds, so that we may know God's wonderful gift of the Gospel of Jesus Christ who died for us and lives for us! So this is all part of being Christ's witnesses to the ends of the earth" (Acts 1:8)
God Bless You and This ministry!
The Church gradually (leadership) focused its chief teaching authority in the office of bishop. Bishops were viewed as rallying points of church unity and as key defenses against heresy (false teaching) as early as c.A.D. 110-115 in the letters of Ignatius, who was bishop of Antioch in Syria. A few decades later, synods (councils) of of various bishops met to deal with threats created by the teachings of a man named Montanus. Other challenges to cardinal Christian truths continued to expose the need for an office within the Church to serve as guardian of the Gospel. Th ordained ministry and especially the chief pastors developed largely as protectors of the Treasure of the Gospel. A key point in this process in the early Church wa the gathering of bishops known as the Council of Nicea, which had to deal with a denial of the full divinity of Christ. In all there were seven major councils of church leaders between A.D. 325 and 787. These are known as the "Seven Ecumenical Councils." Their pronouncements are accepted by virtually the whole Church today.
By the middle of the second century, a man named Marcion had devised his own personal canon of Scripture. A canon is a list of books to be included in the bible. Marcion's distorted theology led him to a Bible of only eleven books, all of them fro the New Testament, none form the Old. Partly because of this severe truncation of Scripture, and partly because of later continuing doctrinal threats, the Church was led by the Holy Spirit to declare an authoritative canon. A council of rabbis had done this for the Old Testament near the end of the first century A.D. Although many New Testament lasted for around two hundred years. This development culminated officially in the final list produced by the Council of Carthage in 397, so, in a sense, representatives of the Church produced the canon. But, for the most part, they were simply acknowledging the scriptural books that had already been accepted as authoritative by most parts of the church. Since every book of the New Testament was written by a member of the church, it is clear that, in the chronology of the Holy Spirit's working, the church preceded the New Testament and produced the New Testament, under divine guidance. The church's book became the single most important component of its doctrinal authority.
Creeds developed not for the ake of intellectual disputation, but to protect the Gospel of Jesus Christ from distortions. Their purpose was not to try to explain what really are mysteries, but rather to protct the mysteries from those who wanted to try toecplain them away. For instance, the Nicene Creed seeks to safeguard the mystery of Christ as both human and divine by eliminating two simplistic options, that Christ was only God , or only human. The Apostles Creed apparently grew out of an ancient baptismal creed, in question-and answer form, used from A.D. 150 in Rome. Gradual developments led to the form in which we now know it A.D. 400 or later.
If we wanted to move beyond the earliest Christian times that we have been describing, we could add a fourth "C" to our list of sources of doctrine namely confessions. In this sense, the word applies to basic statements of faith made by church bodies after the era of the Seven Ecumenical Councils.
As always in learning about church history. the call to faith comes into play. These developments merely are a matter of human defensiveness against the unsettling positions of "outsiders"? Are they simply the scheme of an increasingly organized and privileged Church to protect its own power and authority? Faith answers differently. While always acknowledging human factors and plenty of human error! in history, faith answers with it own confession. The Holy Spirit has led the process of Church and canon and creeds, so that we may know God's wonderful gift of the Gospel of Jesus Christ who died for us and lives for us! So this is all part of being Christ's witnesses to the ends of the earth" (Acts 1:8)
God Bless You and This ministry!
Thursday, May 5, 2011
The Challenge to respond to false teachings
Very early in the Church's history as early as the time of the New Testament various teachings of the church became twisted and distorted. This happened not only at the hands of outsiders, but also from within. It was very important then as it is today to recognize such teachings and to respond effectively and faithfully, in order to follow Christ's command to be his witnesses to the ends of the earth. (Acts 1:8)
False teachings had far reaching effects on the church. The content of various teachings, and the way that Christians responded to these attacks, will be central in this post and the coming ones. But throughout history "new" versions of some of the most ancient of false teachings continued to challenge the church, as they do even today. Today lets look at three influential kinds of teaching.
Most stubbornly pervasive from New Testament times and into today's world is something that historians now call Gnosticism (from the Greek word for knowledge, "gnosis"). Among the primary teachings of this way of looking at life are the following:
Salvation is by knowledge, usually a secret form. Christians influenced by Gnosticism saw Jesus primarily as a divine (not fully human) teacher of this saving kind of knowledge.
There is a great gulf between "matter" and "spirit". Usually the spirit and spiritual things are seen as unequivocally good, and often anything physical is bad, or a hindrance to one's highest spiritual development, or, at best, not very important.
Gnosticism allows for enormous differences in matters of morality. Since physical and spiritual things were worlds apart from each other, some Gnostics counseled not indulging the body at all, while others said it didn't make any difference what you did physically, because God cared only about the spirit.
The church isn't very important compared to the individual.
A spiritual elite supposedly had knowledge of the true spiritual nature of things. They often classified people according to whether they were "spiritual" or merely "carnal."
When Gnosticism came into close contact with Christianity, the tendency was to promote such basic distortions as: Jesus is divine, but not human; salvation does not come from the Cross, but from setting one's spirit free, so Jesus becomes a teacher and example of salvation, but not in a strict sense the Savior. Also, there is a different concept of sin (lack of spiritual knowledge, rather than playing God). In these ways, Gnosticism was (and is) a direct threat to our understanding of the center of Christianity, the person and work of Jesus Christ. (The gospel of Thomas is gnostic)
Marcionism was a very influential form of Gnosticism. IT is named after a wealthy man from a city on the Black Sea in Asia Minor (present day Turkey), who joined the Church in Rome c. A.D. 140. He held most of the Gnostic views stated above, and in A.D. 144 was excommunicated from Rome and started his own church, with the idea: Jesus divine but not human was not born, but appeared fully grown at Capernaum in A.D. 29.
Jesus never suffered on the Cross, but only appeared to.
The god of the Old Testament, a crass, nationalistic "lesser" god, is not the same as the God of the New revealed by Jesus. a God of mercy and love.
Marcion was one of the first to draw up a canon of the New Testament (list of accepted books). He totally omitted the Old Testament from his Bible, and thinking that Paul was the only apostle who properly understood Jesus, included only ten letters of Paul plus the Gospel of Luke. The Marcionite Church survived for centuries, especially in the Orient (Arabia, Armenia, Egypt, etc.). Montanism is an example of taking one aspect of Christian revelation to the extreme, and adding to it. Montanus, a man from central Asia Minor who lived about the same time as Marcion, taught theat he was the "incarnation" of the Holy Spirit. His movement, which lasted several centuries, stressed highly disciplined, ascetic Christian living, manifestations of the Spirit such as speaking in tongues, and a belief in the imminent end of the world. He taught that he (and two prophetesses!) were passive instruments of the Holy Spirit. Montanus was condemned by the earliest synods (gatherings) of bishops of which we have record.
My question, how should Christians respond to false teachings these and countless other varieties? In regard to any specific teaching. three principal options are: reject it out of hand; have nothing to do with it. Swallow it all. Take it very seriously, but know where you stand.
The key result of false teachings in early Church History was for the Church to spell out more clearly its basic beliefs. In the end distortions of christian truth has occurred since earliest times. We need to be sharp theologians and know where we stand. Proclaiming the message of scripture and presenting its theology clearly are continual and essential tasks of the church. If we back away from our theological challenge, then humanly speaking, it probably will and have been destroyed.
God Bless You and this Ministry!!
False teachings had far reaching effects on the church. The content of various teachings, and the way that Christians responded to these attacks, will be central in this post and the coming ones. But throughout history "new" versions of some of the most ancient of false teachings continued to challenge the church, as they do even today. Today lets look at three influential kinds of teaching.
Most stubbornly pervasive from New Testament times and into today's world is something that historians now call Gnosticism (from the Greek word for knowledge, "gnosis"). Among the primary teachings of this way of looking at life are the following:
Salvation is by knowledge, usually a secret form. Christians influenced by Gnosticism saw Jesus primarily as a divine (not fully human) teacher of this saving kind of knowledge.
There is a great gulf between "matter" and "spirit". Usually the spirit and spiritual things are seen as unequivocally good, and often anything physical is bad, or a hindrance to one's highest spiritual development, or, at best, not very important.
Gnosticism allows for enormous differences in matters of morality. Since physical and spiritual things were worlds apart from each other, some Gnostics counseled not indulging the body at all, while others said it didn't make any difference what you did physically, because God cared only about the spirit.
The church isn't very important compared to the individual.
A spiritual elite supposedly had knowledge of the true spiritual nature of things. They often classified people according to whether they were "spiritual" or merely "carnal."
When Gnosticism came into close contact with Christianity, the tendency was to promote such basic distortions as: Jesus is divine, but not human; salvation does not come from the Cross, but from setting one's spirit free, so Jesus becomes a teacher and example of salvation, but not in a strict sense the Savior. Also, there is a different concept of sin (lack of spiritual knowledge, rather than playing God). In these ways, Gnosticism was (and is) a direct threat to our understanding of the center of Christianity, the person and work of Jesus Christ. (The gospel of Thomas is gnostic)
Marcionism was a very influential form of Gnosticism. IT is named after a wealthy man from a city on the Black Sea in Asia Minor (present day Turkey), who joined the Church in Rome c. A.D. 140. He held most of the Gnostic views stated above, and in A.D. 144 was excommunicated from Rome and started his own church, with the idea: Jesus divine but not human was not born, but appeared fully grown at Capernaum in A.D. 29.
Jesus never suffered on the Cross, but only appeared to.
The god of the Old Testament, a crass, nationalistic "lesser" god, is not the same as the God of the New revealed by Jesus. a God of mercy and love.
Marcion was one of the first to draw up a canon of the New Testament (list of accepted books). He totally omitted the Old Testament from his Bible, and thinking that Paul was the only apostle who properly understood Jesus, included only ten letters of Paul plus the Gospel of Luke. The Marcionite Church survived for centuries, especially in the Orient (Arabia, Armenia, Egypt, etc.). Montanism is an example of taking one aspect of Christian revelation to the extreme, and adding to it. Montanus, a man from central Asia Minor who lived about the same time as Marcion, taught theat he was the "incarnation" of the Holy Spirit. His movement, which lasted several centuries, stressed highly disciplined, ascetic Christian living, manifestations of the Spirit such as speaking in tongues, and a belief in the imminent end of the world. He taught that he (and two prophetesses!) were passive instruments of the Holy Spirit. Montanus was condemned by the earliest synods (gatherings) of bishops of which we have record.
My question, how should Christians respond to false teachings these and countless other varieties? In regard to any specific teaching. three principal options are: reject it out of hand; have nothing to do with it. Swallow it all. Take it very seriously, but know where you stand.
The key result of false teachings in early Church History was for the Church to spell out more clearly its basic beliefs. In the end distortions of christian truth has occurred since earliest times. We need to be sharp theologians and know where we stand. Proclaiming the message of scripture and presenting its theology clearly are continual and essential tasks of the church. If we back away from our theological challenge, then humanly speaking, it probably will and have been destroyed.
God Bless You and this Ministry!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)